State Penny Extension
Extend State Penny Sales Tax: Eliminate the
sunset permanently, allowing districts to
maintain facilities and technology without
needlessly increasing property taxes. Future
state penny revenues should remain dedicated
to schools and property tax equity/relief.
School Debt Service Bond Issue Elections
60
55
48
50
42
40
33
31 31
30
27
26 27
24
23
20
19
24
21
20
17
14
11
10
20
12
9
0
FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
School infrastructure local option taxes (SILO) were first available to
districts in FY1999. The State Penny was passed in the 2008 Session.
77
What is reasonable?
The replacement cost of Iowa schools is estimated to be $16.4 billion (Iowa
DE, June 30, 2014). The state penny provides an annual investment of 2.5%, a
reasonable amount to maintain and update Iowa schools, lower property
taxes, update buses and purchase technology and equipment.
78
Formula Equity
Equity: Create basic funding equity for all
children by raising the per pupil allotment to
the current maximum for all districts in the
state.
79
Student Cost per Pupil Inequality
• In FY 2017, the State Cost per Pupil (SCPP) is $6,591.
162 districts (48.6%) are limited to this amount as their
District Cost per Pupil (DCPP).
• The other 171 districts (51.4%) have a DCPP ranging
from $6,592 to $6,766, or $1 to $175 more. This extra
amount is funded with property taxes.
• Under current law, this $1 - $175 difference continues
into the future, accessible to some district but not
others.
80
Range of benefit to different districts if all are raised to max DCPP:
SCPP low
Capacity
Medium
Capacity/Property Tax relief
DCPP High
Property Tax Relief
81
Transportation Equity
82
Transportation
• In the 1950s, Iowa had over 4,000 school districts. Students could walk to
their neighborhood school.
• FY 2015 State cost per pupil was $6,366; 41 Iowa school districts required
at least 10% of that general fund cost per pupil for transportation.
• Transportation expenditures vary from a low of $57.82 to a high of
$980.87 per student enrolled. Square miles per district range from a low
of 2 to a high of 555 square miles, and route miles range from a low of
4,771 to a high of 1,264,105 miles.
• Property tax characteristics, including low valuation per pupil and
corresponding higher tax rates, create challenges for districts with low tax
capacity to pay for buses out of PPEL or Sales Tax funds, further stressing
the general fund budget. When districts have larger transportation costs,
both taxpayer and student inequities worsen.
• General fund dollars spent on busing would otherwise be available for
staff and teachers (salary, benefits, training, and support), curriculum,
programs, technology, and energy. Lack of resources in all of these areas
creates an unequal educational opportunity for students in rural districts.
83
Recent Conversations
• Several Transportation bills have been introduced
in the House in the last two years
– Some provide state aid to the average
– Some provide local tax authority to pay for above
average costs (based on voter approval)
– Some provide redirection of existing funds (penny) to
cover excess transportation costs
– SF 2104 creates both a transportation equity
appropriation and formula equality phase in,
providing transportation equity immediately and
formula equality over 10 years (by 2027).
84
85
Advocacy Toolkit:
http://www.iowaschoolfinance.com/Legislative
Assessment
Fund an assessment system aligned to Iowa
Standards. Implement the recommendation of
the Assessment Task Force to use the Smarter
Balanced Suite of Assessments, measuring
progress along the way, including attainment
and growth.
86
Cost (from Assessment Tax Force Report)
•
The current Iowa Assessments cost to the district is $4.25 to $6.25 per student for
paper-and-pencil tests or $13.00 per student for online tests for basic scoring and
reporting services (plus optional costs for additional reports and other services)
Additional costs of approximately $2.25 per student ($575,000) for additional data
management and reporting are borne by DE.
•
Other local assessments? MAP, Edify Assess, others, unknown total assessment
expenditures by district.
•
SBAC plans to charge $6.20 per student to cover the cost of ongoing item development
and other consortium services. The exact cost of vendor services will be dependent
upon the outcome of the RFP or other negotiations. However, SBAC estimates vendor
services can be procured for $16.30 per student, for a total cost of $22.50 per student
for the summative assessment only. Online administration of the Smarter Balanced
Assessments will be required beginning with the 2017-2018 school year; the costs to
school districts and the state for technology and IT support for statewide online
administration of this assessment have not been quantified.
•
Title VI fed funds averaged $3.97 per pupil in FY 2016 but half that in FY 2017?
•
If SBAC suite of assessments/tools cost an estimated $28 per pupil, would mean $13.9
million total for SBAC minus $1.9 million for Title VI and redirection of DE’s $575,000,
balance of $11 million estimated appropriation, assuming no other redirection of local
funds.
https://www.educateiowa.gov/sites/files/ed/documents/2014-1231AssessmentTaskForceReport.pdf
87
Issues with State Assessment
• Authority – Governor’s veto of additional rules review cleared the way for
SBAC. That was well before the election. SSB 1001 on Senate Ed
Committee agenda today: 1:00 in room 22 with amendment
• Peer Review: Iowa’s assessment doesn’t align and Title 1 funds (and IDEA
over the long run) at-risk if Iowa doesn’t have an aligned assessment
• Technology access (bandwidth, devices, time)
• Summative and Formative Assessments (drive instructional improvement)
Is there savings by moving to one system? When does that savings
occur? Will local districts still need other assessments?
• Science still pending. .. .DE has a prefiled bill which requires science
assessment in grades 5, 8, and 10. (math and reading all grades 3-11)
• Alignment with Iowa content Standards, ESSA compliance, Iowa Report
Card data.
88
Changing the Language: Return
on Investment (ROI)
89
National Bureau of Economic Research, educational spending
does impact educational and economic outcomes. The Effects of
School Spending on Educational and Economic Outcomes:
Evidence from School Finance Reforms, written by C. Kirabo
Jackson (Northwestern University), Rucker C. Johnson
(Northwestern University) and Claudia Persico (University of
California-Berkeley), concludes:
“Money alone may not be sufficient, but our findings
indicate that provision of adequate funding may be a
necessary condition. Importantly, we find that how the
money is spent may be important. As such, to be most
effective it is likely that spending increases should be
coupled with systems that help ensure spending is
allocated toward the most productive uses.”
http://www.nber.org/papers/w20847
90
ROI (NBER study continues):
“A suggestive benefit-cost analysis reveals that investments in
school spending are worthwhile. Increasing spending by 10% for
all school-age years increased wages by 7.25% each year (Table
4). . . .This implies a benefit-cost ratio of 2.01 and an internal
rate of return of 8.9%. This internal rate of return is similar to
those estimated for pre-school programs (Deming, 2009),
smaller than estimates of the internal rates of return for class
size reductions (Fredriksson et al, 2012), and larger than longterm returns to stocks. In sum, the estimated benefits to
increased school spending (that go toward productive inputs)
are large enough to justify the increased spending under most
reasonable benefit-cost calculations.”
91
NY Times It Turns Out Spending More Probably
Does Improve Education
By KEVIN CAREY and ELIZABETH A. HARRIS DEC. 12, 2016
If you spend more on education, will students do better?
Educators, politicians and unions have battled in court over that crucial question for decades, most
recently in a sweeping decision this fall in Connecticut, where a judge ordered the state to revamp
nearly every facet of its education policies, from graduation requirements to special education, along
with its school funding.
For many years, research on the relationship between spending and student learning has been
surprisingly inconclusive. Many other factors, including student poverty, parental education and the
way schools are organized, contribute to educational results. Teasing out the specific effect of money
spent is methodologically difficult.
Opponents of increased school funding have seized on that ambiguity to argue that, for schools,
money doesn’t matter — and, therefore, more money isn’t needed.
But new, first-of-its-kind research suggests that conclusion is mistaken.
Money really does matter in education, which could provide fresh momentum for more lawsuits and
judgments like the Connecticut decision.
92
Studies’ Findings:
•
"In the long run, over comparable time frames, states that send additional money to their
lowest-income school districts see more academic improvement in those districts than states
that don't. The size of the effect was significant. The changes bought at least twice as much
achievement per dollar as a well-know experiment (Tennessee study) that decreased class
sizes in early grades."
•
"Another paper, published this year in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, looked at the
same question through a different lens. That study examined longer-term outcomes, like how
long students stayed in school and how much they earned as adults, for students in districts
with and without court-ordered funding changes. Here, too, researchers saw gains with more
money spent.“
•
“They examined outcomes for about 15,000 people, born between 1955 and 1985, and
found that for poor children, a 10 percent increase in per pupil spending each year of
elementary and secondary school was associated with wages that were nearly 10 percent
higher, a drop in the incidence of adult poverty and roughly six additional months of
schooling.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/nyregion/it-turns-out-spending-more-probably-does-improve-education.html?_r=0
93
Action Steps
• Share these studies, articles, findings with
your board
• Discuss a plan to connect with legislators soon
• Engage the business / parent community in
your advocacy
• Build relationships for the long run: send a
thank you for getting SSA set quickly. Thanks
for sparing K-12 in the deappropriations
process.
94
http://parentsforgreatiowaschools.com/
95
96
Parents for Great Iowa Schools is forming a steering
committee and looking for parents all over Iowa, especially in
rural districts and districts that legislators call home.
http://parentsforgreatiowaschools.com/
Sign a petition
Follow on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/parentsforgreatiowaschools
Attend a public education forum
Rose Green
Rose Green
Cell: 773.844.1782
[email protected]
97
Advocacy Resources for Education
School Choice Background and
Talking Points
February 2017
Margaret Buckton
(515)201-3755 RSAI, UEN, ISFIS
[email protected]
98
School choice advocates are active
99
School Choice Options in Iowa
• Public School in my neighborhood
• Public School in another neighborhood (open
enrollment)
• Virtual academy (CAM/Anita & Clayton Ridge)
• Nonpublic School
• Home school assistance (competent private
instruction)
• Independent private instruction.
100